Replies

Okay, I’ll let you know how I usually operate, if that will help you...

You said — “Most of us are not here with the sole objective to jam the communication, as you are.”

Now, first off, I’m not posting to “jam” communications. You can’t do that on these threads. I mean, when I see another thread (that I’m not on..., by the way) where the posts are 6,000 to 7,000 (on Obama) — no..., I’m not “jamming” this... :-)

Secondly, here is where some of the M.O. comes into play, a methodology that I just happen to do (nothing much more than that...). I will do one of two things in Free Republic (and always have done this from the beginning) — there will be a certain number of threads where there are only one or two or three comments — and then, there will be some threads where I’m on it for one comment after another after another.

There are various subjects where I do the one kind of posting, and other subjects where I do the other (and there are *several* different subject areas, by the way).

Now, this type of thread, where I’ll post one after the other, I’ll be mainly (and at first) replying to various other posters and what their ideas are, and then, perhaps posting to the initial one who put the thread up.

After that, there are usually a whole bunch of replies — of which I’ll try (as diligently as possible) to go one after the other and answer them all. And I do try to answer them all. Sometimes I don’t, but I do try.

Now, that’s not jamming communications, but simply engaging in conversation with as many as possible, and as they also reply back. There’s nothing more sinister than what a “board” is about — and that’s about it...

—

And lastly, you were saying — “You’ll be able to carry out your covert mission more effectively if you appear *less often* -—’thou protest too much’ shines the light on YOU.”

Now..., that presumes that I’ve got a “covert mission”. You think that there is some kind of grand conspiracy here (which seems to run in the minds of a lot of posters who are on this subject for some reason). I’ll say, and very simply, I’m posting from my own views and my own attitudes — and those views and attitudes come from what you see on my home page (that forms the *basis* for most of it), which *includes* getting into the *truth of the matter* regardless of what it means.

And so, even though I was campaigning hard against Obama, before the election (with those around me) and I have no desire to see what he’ll probably try to do, including the values he has which are against mine — I’ll still say what I see is the truth of the matter here — and that includes with Obama, too.

The truth of the matter is that no one has any proof regarding his failure (the allegation) to qualify for the office of President of the United States. Many people are trying, but they don’t seem to produce anything. That’s the truth of the matter.

Now, me saying that — is somehow — said to mean that I don’t support the Constitution. Well, no..., it just means that there is a loophole there big enough to drive a “big Obama” through... LOL.. that’s all...

And no one seems to recognize that. And furthermore, Obama isn’t required to show any more than any previous Presidents showed, so I don’t know how one is going to *get more* out of him - if it wasn’t the case with previous Presidents.

Well..., that is the way I see it — and therefore — that will be the way I “type it”...